Difference between revisions of "Test"

Revision as of 13:42, 3 April 2013

Has temporal scale	Long term (strategic)
Has spatial context	Spatial with neighborhood interrelations
Has spatial scale	Forest level
Has objectives dimension	Multiple
Has goods and services dimension	Market non wood products, Market wood products;Non market services
Has decision making dimension	More than one decision maker/stakeholder
Has risk/uncertainty analysis	no
Has advantages	AHP is a relatively simple and transparent method which is an advantage in participatory planning.
Has disadvantages	Using the standard AHP with pairwise comparisons of both criteria and alternatives may be cognitively demanding to the DM(s) with a larger number of criteria and alternatives. In turn, this may lead to inconsistency in preferences.
Has main contraints	The number of elements to be compared at each level should probably not exceed 4-5.
Has related method
Has method
Has submethods
Has detailed description of methods application in the DSS
Uses programming language
Has reference	Nordström E.-M., Eriksson Ljusk O. & Öhman K. 2010. Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: Experience from a case study in northern Sweden. Forest Policy and Economics 12(8): 562-574.
Has related DSS	In this paper, no full DSS was used; Web-HIPRE was used for the AHP. Since then, AHP has been implemented in the Heureka PlanEval application.

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 |Has decision making dimension=More than one decision maker/stakeholder
 |Has objectives dimension=Multiple
-|Has goods and services dimension=Market non wood products;Market wood products;Non market services
+|Has goods and services dimension=Market non wood products,Market wood products;Non market services
 |Has risk/uncertainty analysis=no
 |Has advantages=AHP is a relatively simple and transparent method which is an advantage in participatory planning.